The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1887-03-03
YILLAGE SEWERS.

concerning the village sewers. especi-
ally the one laid last year from 3d-sv.
TO the east lake. We have been asked
frequently as to the cost of this main
sewer, and whether it was not u LOB"
il the intesest of a few property own
orS, and also rs TO what it cost the tax
payers.
These inquiries on the part of the
people are legitimate aud right. A
full report and statement should be
published once q year by the village.
This is not done. The law should re-
QuiIe it, as it does from the county.
The ADVANCE has complained once Il
year for 4 good many years that there
is no provision for publishing the do.
ings Of the village board aud other
officers. The people are left in the
dark rs to village matters unless the
newspapers choose to hunt up and pub.
lish full statements.
AS to the sewers, we recently called
on Lieut.. PlOtts, the village recorder,
and asked him for a statement as to
the cost Of the several sewers which
have been laid. The total cost Is given
rs follows:
Tenth-st. sewer, 1919 90
South sewer, 5O4 40
North sewer, 10000
is to b.. deducted about $4,000 for
ed for those who tap the sewer. The
village charges $40 for tappage besides,
and there will be, it is claimed, from
fifteen to twenty lateral pipes connect
Ing with the main sewer III the block
from Sd to I'd avenues. This will re.
duce the cost $15O to $500 more. leay-
ing it, say, from $500 to 500.
The ADVANCE has also interviewed
some of the abutting property owners
and they claim that they are more than
paying for the number of feet in front
If their property. The long stretch
from 2d.av. to the lake is through rail
road property, and it is claimed that
this cannot be taxed for sewerage.
They claim also that it would he man
jf-stly njust to make them pay for the
long stretch through other peoples
property. This 's qnite difficulty.
The abutting property could be made
t" pay for the number of feet fronting
it. but who is t" pay for the long
stretch through railroad property to
get M outlet?
The south sewer is probably the most
important one in the village. 1t has
drained and made labitable what was
once u ''slouyl,." 1t cost S5,)4. but
the railroad company has agreed to
pay $50 toward it, thus reducing the
cost to $35l We are Informed that
some of those vino complain about the
Tenth-st. sewer live on the line of the
south sewer and get the full benefit. at
the expense Of the village. II 80, they
are unwise and unjust. for no part of
the village has been so much benefited
by lever rs what is called ''Swede
town" and the property near the south
part of 7th.av.
The north sewer has drained the low
lands on that side of the town and left
= good deal Of property ''ligh and dry"
which before was ''damp'' and unde-
sirable.
All this. remember, has been done at
public expense. Parties living near
the south and north sewers cannot
complain about the Tenth.st. sewer.
The ADVANCE recurs to-. the posi-
tion taken last summer in writing up
the 1Oth-st. sewer. If there is a sys.
TEN adopted for the whole village at
public expense, it is right enough to
put down these three sewers and tax
the village to pxy for them. If there
is not . general system to be carried
out, the abutting property, especially
along the south sewer where the bene-
fit is 80 great, should be made to pay
the expense.
II anybody in town has right to
complain, we have We are paying
heavy tax on our property on 4tl-av.
and 10th st., and none of these sewers
come within square of being the least
direct benefit to us. Yet we pay
good deal more to put down the south
and north sewers than anyone pays
who lives on the line of the sewers.
W. have no complaint tn make If the
village is to have general system.